Was spricht hier und an vielen ähnlichen Stellen gegen die Benennung der Region Schleswig-Holstein? --Snoopy1964 (talk) 08:33, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Snoopy1964, dazu gilt der Benutzungshinweis (Wikidata usage instruction) "Es sollte nur die unterste Verwaltungsebene angegeben werden, diese sollte aber per P131 mit der nächst höheren Ebene verknüpft sein." Das steht bei Property:P131 ungefähr auf der Seitenmitte. Praktisch heißt das:
Brunswik (Q994177) located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) Kiel (Q1707) und
Kiel (Q1707) located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) Schleswig-Holstein (Q1194)
Dass auch der Kieler Stadtteil (wie auch jedes Gebäude in diesem Stadtteil) in Schleswig-Holstein liegt, ergibt sich aus der logischen Verknüpfung. Die Vermeidung von Redundanzen ist ein wesentlicher Vorteil strukturierter Daten. --Te750iv (talk) 09:50, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


  • Hello. Why you revert my edits? I am working for Azerbaijani Wikipedia.--Neriman2003 (talk) 13:43, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
@Neriman2003: because you removed correct statements (example), or needlessly replaced specific with more general statements (like [1] or [2]), or made other mistakes which lead to messed up or dysfunctional links on many other Wikipedias (see [3] and comment). --Te750iv (talk) 14:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata:WikiProject EnergyEdit

Hello again. May I invite you to join (and watch) the above project, if you are interested? I see you are knowledgeable in the Energy industry and Wikidata. As you can see (in the project), there is a lot to do, and having like-minded people around would certainly make things easier. :) Goodnight from here. Rehman 16:03, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Rehman: of course, will join (had it already on my watchlist, but it seemed abandoned until yesterday). There's really much to do, many inconsitencies all around. Keep up your good work. --Te750iv (talk) 16:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Service entry for Kassø-Tjele power lineEdit

Hi Te750iv,

I am not sure the edit Special:Diff/908866431 is correct. A new upgraded power line with two 1.800 MW systems was opened that date, but it replaced an older 1150 MW system which had been in service for about 40 years, I think. The old system was later removed. I don't know how to express that on Wikidata. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 13:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

@Dipsacus fullonum: good question. Generally, there are two options, which both work for me: Using separate items as it is done for many buildings (e.g. pont Notre-Dame (Q21079205) and pont Notre-Dame (Q1061959), combined with structure replaced by (P167) and similar properties), OR altering statements and adding a couple of specific qualifiers (start time, end time, applies to part, object has role, etc) to relevant statements.
The old line (visible here) was a different structure which has been replaced completely (new pylons, wires, and all other equipment). The new route is nearly identical to the old one, but there are differences (varying places of foundations, formerly overhead-only vs. overhead and underground today, etc). The endpoints (substations) and, of course, the functionality (transmission of electricity (Q29585403)) are identical.
Do you have basic information about the old line(s)? Especially, do you know if the route was – in the last century – already handled as a single entity and called Kassø–Tjele? Or was it perhaps planned/built/operated as separated entities, e.g. in two sections like Kassø–Revsing power line (Q62924256) and Revsing–Tjele power line (Q62922138)?
As far as I can say there is no really unified scheme for transmission grids on Wikidata yet. In some cases, power lines are described on a per-circuit level (e.g. Slovakia, and in particular hundreds of Australian items like 7188/2 (Q29843189) and 7188/3 (Q29843188)). In other cases two or more circuits and various line subsections including their development over time are described as one system (e.g. Nord-Süd-Leitung, mainly for historical reasons and due to common usage). For the majority of European power lines on Wikidata, I would say it's a mixture (with or without construction history) with a focus rather on the linear infrastructure aspect than on pure electrical connections (circuit level). --Te750iv (talk) 15:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, the old line was a single entity from Kassø to Tjele. In fact substation Revsing was build specifically for the new line (Revsing is the Danish start point for Viking Link (Q21208645)). The new line is in most places built 40 m from the old line, either to the west or to the east, with 17 crossings. I only created Kassø–Revsing power line (Q62924256) and Revsing–Tjele power line (Q62922138) for technical reasons in order to make a mapframe with geographical data from OpenStreetMap where they are recorded as separate relations. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 15:59, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
PS. I am impressed that you found the photo from 2006 showing the old line in the background. How did you do that? I have now used the photo in the article in Danish Wikipedia. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 15:29, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
@Dipsacus fullonum: Thanks for the reply. In the meantime I found some older documents which might be useful as additional information for the article, too.
In regard to the different (re)construction dates, I'm still thinking about the best item/statement/qualifier combinations. Not sure yet. Please feel free to improve if you find a way quicker than I do.
There's no mystery about the 2006 image. I only came across this topic because Villy added the Kassø–Tjele category with the new images directly to the general high-voltage category (a bit too unspecific). I then tried to categorize it better. Some of the new images included "Bølling Sø ved Engesvang" as location info. And the old image was already in the Bølling Sø category, which I looked at before creating the Engesvang transition station category. That's it. --Te750iv (talk) 21:32, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
I found the reel service entry date (1965) for Kassø-Tjele and it is a constraints violation to have more than one service entry date, so another solution should be found if want to keep the 2014 date. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 23:35, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
@Dipsacus fullonum: good catch. significant event (P793) should work. --Te750iv (talk) 00:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
By the way you will also now see why I never wrote 400 kV in the Danish label or description. The line started as a 150 kV power line. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 23:51, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
@Dipsacus fullonum: Voltage upgrades are common, even without building new pylons. It's no problem to use the most recent status for labels/descriptions (as we do e.g. with roads or buildings, which had multiple changes of designations over time). --Te750iv (talk) 00:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Substation TjeleEdit

Hi, You wrote that Tjele substation and converter station (Q29084840) is named after the manor house Tjele Gods (Q12339461). Do you have any sources for that? I am pretty sure it was named after the municipality Tjele Municipality (Q1812422) which existed when it was build in 1976. But the municipality is named after the manor house. By the way where did you find the short name TJE? --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 09:09, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

@Dipsacus fullonum: Thanks for the clarification on the settlement name. Actually, I wasn't sure if the substation was built before or after the former municipality was created in 1970, or if it could have been named after Tjele Sogn (Q2705008), which seems unlikely due to the more or less religious nature of sogns. And because Tjele Gods is linked simply as "Tjele" (bebyggelse) on dawiki, that seemed an ok choice to me. Glad that you improved it.
Station short names are used on several occasions, in technical publications (also on the European level), on grid/circuit diagrams, but also publically visible on signs like here. See e.g. Energinet's system data at [4] (table download) for a handy overview. --Te750iv (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the link to Energinet's net data, and also to the reports about the Kassø–Tjele power line. The latter is the Environmental Impact Assessment report with all appendixes. I already used the main report in the Danish article, but some of the appendixes give more details. I can add about the naming of Substation Tjele that I lived in the area as a child then the substation was built, so my statement is based on local knowledge, but I unfortunately don't have any formal sources to support it. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 14:38, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Item for underground power line cable?Edit

Hello, could you please help me again?

I sought an item for an underground power line cable without success. Do you know if a such item exists? If not yet, I would be glad if you will help create it as I am unsure about the correct terms in English and German.

I wanted the item to describe Q63184980, Q63208922, Q63209004, Q63208969 and Q63208445 which are the underground parts of Kassø–Tjele power line (Q62928851). They correspond to OpenStreetMap way objects and are used to mark the underground parts on the map in the Wikipedia article da:Højspændingsforbindelsen Kassø - Tjele. Best regards, Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 12:25, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

@Dipsacus fullonum: yeah, this is already on my action list for some time, so it's good you ask. Currently, undergrounding (Q7883691) is a mix of various meanings in different languages (process vs. cable vs. power line). A similar problem also exists at high-voltage direct current power line (Q370607), by the way (HVDC in general vs. HVDC power lines). Last year, I already created underground power lines (de: unterirdische Stromleitung, coll. Erdkabel = underground cable) and high-voltage underground power lines on Commons; both have some good content in subcategories.
As there is a bunch of links to check and fix on the sites, creating new items for underground power lines and resorting items/statements will take some time. I'll take care asap. --Te750iv (talk) 12:52, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. Any time at your convinience would be fine. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 16:16, 19 April 2019 (UTC)


I notice that you recently attempted to merge nuclear weapons of China (Q65242892) into nuclear weapons of China (Q4536284) manually, leaving an empty item. I have fixed up that up for you. May I recommend that you look at Help:Merge for the future? Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 00:17, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bovlb: thanks, since a code update in March some of the most useful gadgets like merge.js no longer work for me (a drawback of mobile optimization, I think). For the moment, I can leave empty items to the bots (up for listing for deletion, e.g. recently created ones, like the one you fixed), or I have to use MergeItems (which is inconvenient, often slow, and sometimes even gives an error). --Te750iv (talk) 02:02, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Zone vs. boundaryEdit

A EEZ is not a boundary, but has boundaries. 22:11, 21 December 2019 (UTC)